Wright v Granath

Wright v Granath

Article 27 of the Lugano Convention does not apply because the Norwegian and English proceedings do not have the same cause of action; the Norwegian claim requires proof of negligence, which is not an element in English defamation law, and the legal principles are not mirror images.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Craig Wright; Defendant/respondent: Magnus Granath
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Lis Pendens, Jurisdiction, Negative Declaratory Relief, Lugano Convention, Defamation, Conflict of Laws
Private International Law Defamation Lis Pendens Jurisdiction Negative Declaratory Relief Lugano Convention Conflict of Laws

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Craig Wright

Claimant/appellant

Magnus Granath

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Article 27 of the Lugano Convention applies to defamation claims
  2. 2 Whether the Norwegian and English proceedings involve the same cause of action under Article 27

Ratio Decidendi

Article 27 of the Lugano Convention does not apply because the Norwegian and English proceedings do not have the same cause of action; the Norwegian claim requires proof of negligence, which is not an element in English defamation law, and the legal principles are not mirror images.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The English proceedings are not barred by Article 27 of the Lugano Convention; proceedings may continue in England.